Ontologies
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17184/eac.anthropen.035Keywords:
Alterity, Multiplicity, Theory of reality, Non-human, Belief systemsAbstract
Ontologies refer to local studies pertaining to the concepts of being and reality. The ontological turn in anthropology allowed for the renewal of apprehensions related to alterity as well as multiplicity and enabled innovative conceptual and methodological routes, such as the apprehension of the non-human. Practical and political dimensions of ontologies should also be considered.
References
Blaser, M. (2013), «Ontological Conflicts and the Stories of Peoples in Spite of Europe. Toward a Conversation on Political Ontology», Current Anthropology, Vol.54, n°5, p.1-22. https://doi.org/10.1086/672270
Chakrabarty, D. (2009), Provincialiser l’Europe ; la pensée postcoloniale et la différence historique, Paris, Éditions Amsterdam.
Clammer, J., Poirier, S. et É. Schwimmer (dirs.) (2004), Figured Worlds. Ontological Obstacles in Intercultural Relations, Toronto, University of Toronto Press. https://doi.org/10.3138/9781442674899
Descola, P. (2005), Par-delà nature et culture, Paris : Gallimard.
Hallowell, A. I. (1960), « Ojibwa Ontology, Behavior and World View », in S. Diamond (dir.), Culture in History. Essays in Honor of Paul Radin, New York, Columbia University Press, p.19-52.
Henare, A., Holbraad, M. et S. Wastell (dirs.)(2007), Thinking through things. Theorising artefacts ethnographically, London, Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203088791
Ingold, T. (2000), The Perception of the Environment. Essays in livelihood, dwelling and skill, Londres, Routledge, p.132-151.
Kohn, E. (2013), How Forests think. Toward an Anthropology beyond the Human, Berkeley, University of California Press. https://doi.org/10.1525/california/9780520276109.001.0001
Latour, B. (1999), Politiques de la nature, Paris, La Découverte.
— (1991), Nous n’avons jamais été modernes. Essai d’anthropologie symétrique, Paris, La Découverte.
Nadasdy, P. (2007), « The gift in the animal: the ontology of hunting and human-animal sociality », American Ethnologist, Vol.34, n°1, p.25–43. https://doi.org/10.1525/ae.2007.34.1.25
Poirier, S. (2013), « The Dynamic Reproduction of Hunter-Gatherers’ Ontologies and Values », in J. Boddy et M. Lambek (dirs.), A Companion to the Anthropology of Religion, Oxford, Wiley Blackwell, p.50-68. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118605936.ch2
Strathern, M. (1988), The Gender of the Gift, Berkeley, University of California Press.
— (1992), Reproducing the Future. Anthropology, Kinship and the New Reproductive Technologies, New York, Routledge.
Venkatesan, S. (2010), « Ontology is just another word for culture », Critique of Anthropology, Vol.30,n°2, p.152-200. https://doi.org/10.1177/0308275X09364070
Viveiros de Castro, E. (1998), « Les pronoms cosmologiques et le perspectivisme amérindien », in É. Alliez (dir.), Gilles Deleuze, Une vie philosophique, Paris, Le Plessis-Robinson, p.429-462.
— (2009), Métaphysiques cannibales, Paris, PUF.
Wagner, R. (2014), L’invention de la culture, Bruxelles, Zones sensibles (édition originale en anglais [1975]).
Woolgar, S. et J. Lezaun (2015), « The Wrong bin bag: A Turn to Ontology in Science and Technology Studies ? », Social Studies of Science, Vol.43, n°3, p.321–340. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312713488820
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
Categories
License
Copyright (c) 2016 Anthropen
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Unless otherwise stated, content comprised on this website, including text, photographs, illustrations, trademarks, logos, audio or video clips, is protected by copyright law. All rights, titles and interests in the content belong exclusively to Anthropen. With the exception of works licensed under CC BY NC ND 4.0 any copying, reproduction, distribution, total or partial modification is strictly prohibited without the written permission of Anthropen and may expose the offender to legal sanctions.